Search for: "ROUNDS v. STATE"
Results 4061 - 4080
of 7,646
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Dec 2014, 2:43 am
” A friendly reminder: We rely on our readers to send us links for the round-up. [read post]
22 Dec 2014, 3:41 am
Private copying levy systems are not harmonised in the EU, and some Member States do not even collect levies or decided to get rid of them altogether. [read post]
20 Dec 2014, 7:00 am
” Wells Bennett linked us to an interesting little order in United States v. [read post]
19 Dec 2014, 1:33 am
It's free but you still have to email Tim Coppen here to tell him that you'd like to attend.LinkedIn round-up. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 10:48 pm
Two weeks ago, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held a hearing on the damages award and underlying liability issues in the first Apple v. [read post]
18 Dec 2014, 3:25 am
Finance) previews EEOC v. [read post]
17 Dec 2014, 9:36 pm
But, he also asked the United States Supreme Court to decide the NSA surveillance issue, citing a “looming gulf” between the facts in Smith v. [read post]
17 Dec 2014, 9:42 am
Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. [read post]
17 Dec 2014, 3:40 am
In Heien v. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 12:33 pm
v=_w7qPokZL7M The Freedom Group’s CEO is George Kollitides. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 6:00 am
In Heien v. [read post]
16 Dec 2014, 4:49 am
Co. v. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 2:41 pm
The Tennessee case is Tanco v. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 6:00 am
See Peter Mayer Publishers, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Dec 2014, 2:49 am
[Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioner in State Water Contractors v. [read post]
13 Dec 2014, 9:07 am
State v. [read post]
12 Dec 2014, 2:51 pm
Updated information on the state of Ohio’s response to the petition in Henry v. [read post]
12 Dec 2014, 4:53 am
A friendly reminder: We rely on our readers to send us links for the round-up. [read post]
11 Dec 2014, 6:00 am
Wong and United States v. [read post]
10 Dec 2014, 12:31 am
This Kat did not have time to get round to reading Hospira v Genentech when it first emerged, and did not immediately notice that it was an entire new case in its own right, and not simply a codicil to the decision that he reported here. [read post]
